The US has grappled with many questions about society’s obligations as to whether or not to offer services and benefits to the men and women in the armed forces. Supporters argue that helping veterans will help the society as whole and opponents argue that we shouldn’t be increasing our federal government spending in repaying veterans. Although I do see where people can argue that we are spending too much money on helping veterans after war, I believe that the government owes them for what they have done for the country, despite the cost. The government owes certain benefits to veterans because the men and women in the armed forces deserve to be welcomed home with a generous system of services for what they have done for the country. Helping veterans goes way back all the way to the 1600s. During the Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress of 1776 encouraged enlistments by authorizing pensions for soldiers who were disabled. Later, individual states and even communities provided medical and hospital care to veterans. There is an increased need for extensive medical and disability benefits for veterans as medical technology is better able to save the lives of the soldiers. The increase in women veterans is also an issue at hand because …show more content…
They argue that the government should not be spending significant amounts of money to veterans or people that just came out of war. While they acknowledge that some veterans are so psychologically damaged by their experiences in battle that they cannot function properly in society and require disability payments, other veterans, they say, may become unnecessarily dependent on veterans' services. Although, all these are valid arguments that they can make, in the long run by helping veterans out it will greatly impact not only veterans individually but the society in a positive